VISHAL MATHUR AND DIVYA MATHUR vs PAREENA INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.

MHARERA #, euRuenRvr BEFORE THE HARY 1.

Vishal Mathur 2.

Divya Mathur All RR/o: D-4, Danaguru, Deanor, Mumbai, Maharash M/s Pareena Infrastru Office: Flat no.

2, palm Sector-6.

Dwarka, N Also at : C7A,2"d Fl Sohna Road, Secto CORAM: Shri Arun Kumar Shri Vijay Kumar Goyal Shri Ashok Sangwan APPEARANCE: T{ Sh.

Abhishek P.ao ii. i,;;;il;*Gu 1.

The present complaint da complainant/allottees under s DevelopmentJ Ac!

2016 (in sh Real Estate (Regulation and D for violation ofsection 11(4)[a Page 1 of20 AUTH Complaint No.

2454 of 2022 NA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY RITY, GURUGMM -40 Complaintno. : First date ofhearing: Date ofdecision : nar Village Road, 2454 of2o22 27.O7.2022 2L.O5.2024 Complainants Respondent Chairman Member Member am-12W RERA Counsel for Complainants Counsel for Respondent OIiDER 06.06.2022 has been filed bv the ction 31 of the Real Estate fRegulation and rt, the Act) read with rule 28 ofthe Haryana opment) Rules,2017 fin shor! the RulesJ ofthe Act wherein it is inter alia prescribed lt A.

2. ffiEARESA ffiounueRlHl Complaint No.

2454 of 2022 that the promoter shall be responsible for all obligations, responsibilities and functions under the provisions of the Act or the Rules and regulations made t}lere under or to the allottees as per the agreement for sale executed inter se.

Unit and proiect related details The particulars of unit details, sale consideration, the amount paid by the any, have been detailed in the f, 2 sq.ft. (Super areaJ per page no.

21 ofthe complaint) 73.12.20t3 [As per page no.

19 ofthe complaint] Name and lo ces", Sector-99A, Nature ofth DTCP lice 12.03.2013 valid up to Name of li RERA Registe registered /rSL/2020/335 dated 020 valid up to t1,.03.2024 Unit no. and oor andTower-1 21 ofthe comDlaint Unit area admeasuring Date of execution of apartment buyer's Possession clause Thqt the developer shall, under normal conditions, subject to force majeure, complete construction oI Tower/Building in which the said ltat is to be located within 4 within 4 years ol the stsrt of construction or execution of this reement whichever is later, as per the Page 2 of 20 , delay period, if Residential ffi HARERA S-GuRUGRAI/ Complaint No.

2454 of2022 to be calculated 4 years f execution of apartment i.e., 73.12.2073.) od allowed said plans and speciJiffitt accepted by the Fla t Allott ee..,.............. and 5.7 In case within a period os provided hereinabove, further extcnded by a p-:ri?d o[6(six) months if so required b! the developer, the developer is inable to complete c.onstruction of the sqid llat os provded hereinabove (subject to lorce maieure condi.tions) to the fiqt allonee(s), who hove mode payments oi required for in this ogreement, then the llot allouee$j shall titled to the payment ofcompensation ?.lay ot the rate of Rs.

S/_ per sq.ft per of the super area iill the iote oy possessrbn as provided in this 7greement The flat tllhave no other cloim ooainst ikrespect of the sqid ll\t and qnd 35 ofthe complaint Due date of $ Payment Plan ction linked payment plan .44 ofthe complaint e of payments on page Total sale consideratio .1 ,40 ,17 ,7 52 / - (As per _schedule of payments or page no.

44 ofthe comDlaintl Amount paia Uy ttre complainant (As per cancellation letter on page no.

55 ot the comDlaint) Rs.72,99,822 / - Reminder/Demand Notices 1"4.03.2017, 05.07.2021, 13.07.2018 and L9.0L.202t Pre-cancellation Iertei As per page no.57 ofthe comDlaint t0.06.2021 Page 3 of20 lr \1].:'Lc-!r!g!-J]t 1it.06.2 018 B.

3.

C.

4. tt ffiHARERA H GuRUo-RAI/ Complaint No.

2454 of2022 Facts ofthe complaint The complainants have made e following submissions in the complaint: I.

That the complainants had unit in the project named .Coban Residences' of the respond 94, Gurugram, Haryana and the complainants was all 903, Tower 1, at lgthFloor, admeasuring 2355 n on 27.07.2013.

The builder buyer 3.L2.2013.

That the complainants till the agreed terms the unit was to be ent. to be ent.

The possession of complainants within 48 months from the er buyer agreement.

The possession was on 12 .12 .20L7 .

That almost 4 years s .72,99,822/- as per respondent still failed to handover the Reliefsought by rhe The complainants have sought Directthe respondentto pay de rate ofinterest, llowing relief[sJ. possession charges along with prescribed Cancellation letter 1,2.08.2027 no.

55 ofthe complaint Occupation Certi completion certi Not on record Offer ofpossession 1,4.L2.2022 Page 4 of 20 20.

I. *HARERA SGuRuGRAM 5.

On the date ofhearing, the a D.

6. about the contraventions as a section 11(4J (a) ofthe act to Reply by the respondent The respondent has contested a.

Thatthe present complaint complainants have not co and have concealed the tru b.

That the respondent is in group housing col Residences" at Se occupation certifi That quite conve the complainant. deriving undue b Hon'ble Authority d.

That the respo question despite of there installments by various commitment on the part of various frivolous petitions, the capability ofthe respon The amounts which were been spent ln the devel Page 5 of20 Complaint No.

2454 of2022 ority explained to the respondent/promoter eged to have been committed in relation to lead guilty or not to plead guilty. complaint on the following grounds. notmaintainable in the eyes ofthe law.

The e with clean hands before this Hon'ble forum facts. developing several residential of them one is "Coban as already applied for ted. been concealed by a motive of ich may be passed by this t. op the project in one with ng various instances of non-payments of Iottees.

This clearly shows unwavering e respondent to complete the proiect. yet, such as the present one seriously hampers ent to deliver the project as soon as possible. lized from the complainants have already ent work of the proposed project. d project.

On the ffiHARERA # aJRUoRAM other hand the respondent is sti ---l ll ready to deliver the unit in question of this due completion to the complainan! ofcourse, subiect to payment of due installments and charges. e.

Admittedly completion of prorect is dependent on a collective payment by all the alrottees and just because few ofthe alottees paid the amount, demand does not fulfill the criteria ofcollective payment It is submitted that numerous allottees have defaul-ted on the payment demanded bvthe respondenl resulted in delaii& ofiompletion of ,.",*,, ,", *" respondent is trying to compiete rhe project as soon as possible by managing available funrJs J\ ng available fuI nds. ,r\ Y;r.\ Sr.

Year Total Demand Total Amount Balance Not Received lAmi in Cr,) 7.

2073 45.51 37.47 8.09 10.03 1r1 2. zot+ | zs.* 19.32 3.

2075 9.87 8.76 4.

2016 51.9 29.07 22.83 5.

2A17 22.52 18.85 6.

20ta L6.27 15.36 0.92 7.

2479 0.2 3 1.34 ,1.11 8.

202a 4.2L 0.54 3.61 PaEe 6 of ZO I ffiHARERA # aJRUcRAT/ That from said workshee respondent on the basis of period of time numerous the relevant stages of inadequate funds.

Thus the allottees is beyond the the Apartment months was subj any stretch of normal.

It is sub 300/0 payment was site is completed those allottees be made to suffer That other than above stated r there are lots other reason i.e NGT Control) Authority Panchkula orders, Orders, Environment IP]'evention orders, Haryana State po tion Control Commissioner, Municipal ration, Gurugram which hamper the progress of constructio construction work. stoppage of 49.21 ts department of clear that over a in their payments at to construct with of amount by the tted that even in period of 4 years 6 rce majeure and with are not above more than yet the work at the it is the faults of should not 1 130.71 GRA No.2454 of 2022 prepared by the available.

It is of in many cases Page 7 of 20 ffiHARERA H GllRuGRAr,/ g. uGRAr,/ g.

That the situation of COVI that since march 2020 till construction progress in now, there have been be comprehended. imposed restrictio they had no al control.

That project yide noti aforesaid was the peri restrictions were our country saw March 2021 and government.

That whole of imposed by state governm allowed etc.That the Ilon,bl developer has to face seve Page B of 20 laborers, complete lockd several other restrictions. completely stopped either restrictions, that metro citi maior outburst of COVID ca 2/3d time there could be construction progressed at Complai\t N o.

2 4 S 4 of 2022 pandemic is in the knowledge of everyone, w our country has seen mass migration of in whole of t}te country, curfews and at present situation seriously hampers the lestate sector.

That from march 2020 till ral months where construction work was due _to. nationwide lock down or regional n and Delhi suffered from a s in such a number which can,t of labour due to state in these times since tion to come under for completion of six months.

But the wave but the relaxation in r soon thereafter D from the month of tly restrictions have been lifted by the s consumed more than lL months wherein no construction and rest of the time very slow pace to several restrictions t on movement and number of person authority would appreciate the fact that difficulties in construction of project few ffi HARERa ffiGTJRTJGRAN/ Complaint No.

2454 of2022 out of the several are already discussed above and moreover complainant did not opt services of respondent against a single unit isolated from whole of the project or other units in same tower.

That at the time of seeking allotment in the project of respondent , complainant very well knew that unit / apartment in question is a part of tower consisting of several other units and the unit shall be completed along with other units which belong to other allottees. allottees. lt is submitted that merely because few allottees have paid on time, it does not fulfill the criteria of complete paymcnt required for construction of whole of the tower/project.

That . the tq#,ain"Sq i<n!w tnat without complete i i ._:.rl ,1. l_ payment on time frdm all allottees it t3'no&posiible or quite difficult to complete the project on time. tt is submitted that for the same reason the clause of "force majeure" w:rs madc part oUf*?Pment.

It is submitted that it is absolutely beyohci the control qf (glh]6per to get money from 'it the buyer on time.

It is sUbmittedihat after idemand was raised, the only thing developer can do is to send a reminder and in extreme cases !i cancellation.

But reminderJ ;r iaricellatioi donoi Lring money which the developer had alre4dy incurred 41d is incurEipg.,qontinuously.

That even the Hon'ble Apex court has already held that notice, order, rules, notification of the Government and/or other public or competent authority, including any prohibitory order of any court against development of property comes under force majeure and period for handing over ofthe possession stood extended during the prevalence of the force maieure event.

Page 9 of 20 ffi HARERA ffi aTRUGRAN/ h.

That material, labor and i.

That the construction is to raise complete constru such cases if refund is utilized for co amount dem keeping in view complaint is not All other averments Copies of all the relevant Their authenticity is the basis of these parties.

E.

Jurisdiction ofthe autho 9.

The authority has complete adjudicate the present complai E.I Territorial iurisdiction As per notificatio n no.

1. /92 /20 7. o.

10. and Country Planning Dep Page 10 of 20 tt ifallottees wishes to get th to pay on time, since with proiect on time. natural iustice.

It is pertin which was received by res Complaint No. plaint No.

2454 of 2022 er requirements does not comes for free and possession on time than it is their legal duty t money it is not possible to construct the procal to amount paid and it is not possible n without getting complete amount.

That in ted than it would be absolutely against the here that whatsoever amount construction has already been t who never paid the n respondents.

Thus nces, present ed in toto. and placed on record. can be decided on ission made by the GUi GRAM itorial and subject matter jurisdiction to for the reasons given below.

7-1TCP dated t4.1,2.201,7 issued by Town t, Haryana the jurisdiction of Haryana Real tl.

HARERA MGURUGRAI/ Complaint No.

2454 of2022 Estate Regulatory Authority, Gjrrugram shall be entire Gurugram district for all purposes.

In the present ca$e, the project in question is situated within the planning area of Gurugr]am district Therefore, this autlority has complete territorial iurisdictiorh to deal with the present complaint.

E,IISubiect-matter iurisdictlon Secuon 11(4J(aJ of the Act, 2016 provides tlat the promoter shall be responsible to the allottee as per g.eement for sale.

Section 11(4)(aJ is reproduced as hereunder: ogJi.ffifrfr section 77 lW "; ^rrs'";,Mr* the ossociol%of ollotltees,rs{ fte kshln aybLfiJ the convevance of ott the a*fuf,ns, Notsp; huitding'ir5 ilrbe nay be, to the i:_:;Wa'otteesorthe 34A oI the Act plii{ei'b gqgllffince of the obtigations cost upon the promot4rc,+bWffi{and the real estote ogents under this Acrt apd the[rle*aAl W otiou my'e thereunder.

So, in view of the provisions pf the_ act quoted above, the authority has Iit,i[' .l' { t a._r-ll.-t .l' comprete iurisdict,"" f"jTtf lil,," 919?t]iil,i],,"g non-compriance of obligations by the promoter lpaving aside compensation which is to be decided by the adjudicating officer ifpursued by the complainants at a later stage.

F.

Findings on obiectioris raised by the respondent: F. ondent: F.t Oblection regarding delay {ue to force maieure circumstances The respondent-promoter raisid a contention that the construction of the proiect was delayed due to forie majeure conditions such as various orders 72.

13.

Page 11ofZ0 ffi HARER, ., HGuRucRA[/ Complaint No.

2454 of2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court or NGT, Iockdown due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic and non-payment of instalments by different allottees.

Further, the authority has gone through the possession clause of the agreement and observed that the respondent-developer proposes to handover the possession ofthe allotted unit within a period of4 years from the date of start of construction or date of execution of buyer's agreement, whichever is later." In the presel:.:ase, the date of execution of buyer's agreement is 73.12.2013 and date of start of construction is not on record.

So, the due date is calculated from the date of execution of buyer agreement which comes out to be 1.3.06.2018 [including grace periodJ, which is prior to . ,:.,i ' .. i . . ,!t r.. r*t;a the occurance of Covid-19 restrictions and hence, the respondent cannot be may not be regular in paying the amount due but the interest of all the stakeholders concerned with the said proiect cannot be put on hold due to fault of some of the allottees.

Thus, the promoter/respond ent cannot be given any leniency based on aforesaid reasons and the plea advanced in this regard is untenable.

Findings on the reliefsought by the complainants.

G.l Direct the respondent to pay the delay possession alongwith prescribed rate of interest..

The complainant was allotted unit no 1903, 19fr floor in tower project "Coban Residences" by the respondent-builder for charges 1 in the a total 74.

Page 12 of ZO G HARER,,I MGURUGRAI\I Complaint No.

2454 of 2022 consideration of Rs.

7,40,77,752/- against which the complainant paid amount of Rs.

72,99,822/-.

The buyer agreement executed between parties on t2.L2. on t2.L2.2013 and due date of possession comes out to 12.05.2018 including grace period..

The contention ofthe respondent is that the complainants have defaulted jn making payment with respect to allotted unit.

The respondent has placed on recordthe reminder letters sentto complainants regarding payment ofdues.

Accordingly, the respondent had issrrgd reminder letters dated -L4.03.201,Z, 05.0L.2021, L3.07.2018 and 1,9.01.2021 for payment of dues.

But the complainant did not pay any heed to thb respondent due to which the respondent issued pre-caSoetlaUon tte$ei laqe d IO.06.ZOZL and finally 'a , ^\ cancelled the unit vide letteruated I2.08.202f.; ' . ,t Upon perusal of documents and submiisions mldtibi both the parties s, the Authority observes that the respondent-builder iasriSd a cancellation notice , t... i l: dated 12.08.202 1 on iciliuJrr.of non-pry."ri uiildgomplainant.

However, the respondent filed an amEnded reply od ldy.OS.zoz+ wherein the respondent additionally iiiLmitted that an !ffer of possession dated 14.72.022 was made to the complainant. ihe cancellation letter dated 12.08.2021 stands reVokedl i[self as the ,r"Sont"n, itself offered the | ''i;-{ -''_-" possession to the complainint ifter cailc6lling:tfre iinit which clarifies the intention ofthe respondenttg contin u e with the buyer's agreement executed between t}le parties.

In view of the above, the said cancellation made by the respondent is hereby quashed.

It is important to note that the complainants have sought the relief of refund along with interest through the complainant but vide proceeding dated 21".L2.2023, the proxy counsel for the complainant stated that the complainant-allottee is willing to take possession of the allotted unit after an the be 15.

76. t7.

Page 13 of 20 HARER;I GURUGIiAN/ possession and is reproduced belorv for ready reference: complaint No.

2454 of 2022 adjustment of delayed possession charges to be paid by the respondent and same was not obiected by the respondent. espondent.

18.

In the present complaint, the complainant intend to continue with proiect and is seeking delay possession charges as provided under proviso to section 1B(1J ofthe AcL Sec.

18[1J proviso reads as under. "Section 78: - Return ofamount and compensation the the 18(1).

If the promoter foils to complete or is unable ta give possession of an apartment, plot or building, - Provided that where ai sllottee dies not intend to withdraw from the pr_oject, he shall be pqid, by the promoter, interest for every month of delay, till the handing over of the possession, at such rate qs may be prescribed,,',' 19.

3.1 That the developer sha , under nonna! canditions, subject to Jbrce majeLtre, complete construction of Tower/Building in which the ssid flat is to be located within 4 yeors of the sturt of construction or execution of this Agreeme t wllichever is later, os per the saicl plqns anLl speciJicutions sein untl accepted by the Flat Allottee (with additionql floors for residentiol utlits execute ifpermissible) r,tith such additions, deletions, alterations, modifcations in thn Iayout, tower plans, chqnge in rulmber, dimensions, height, size, area or change o,f entire scheme the developer may consider necessary or moy be required by un1, competent authority to be made in them or any oJ them.

To implement all or any of competent autlloriry tu be made in them or any oJ them.

To implement all or any of these charges, supplementary sale deed(s)/ogreements. if necessary will be got executed and registered by the developer which the iat allottee(s) unr)ertakes tct (Emphasis supptied) 20.

At the inception, it is relevant to comment on the pre-set possession clause of the floor buyer's agreement wherein the possession has been subjected to numerous terms and conditions and force majeure circumstances. umstances.

The drafting ofthis clause is not only vague but so heavily loaded in favour ofthe promoters that even a single default by the allottee in fulfilling obligations, formalities and documentations etc. as prescribed by the promoter may Page 14 of 20 . (Emphasis supplied) 's agreement provides for handing over of ffiHARER i H eunuerul,r Complaint No.

2454 of 2022 make the possession clause irrelevant for the purpose of allottees and the commitment date for handing over possession loses its meaning.

The incorporation ofsuch clause in the buyer's agreement by the promoter is just to evade the liability towards timely delivery of subject unit and to deprive the allottee of his right accruing alter delay in possession.

This is just to comment as to how the builder has misused his dominant position and drafted such mischievous clause in the agreement and the allottee is left with no option but to sign on the dotted lines.

21.

Admissibility of grace period: The promoter has proposed to hand over i.e.,73.1.2.2013 which conres out to bll 13.12.20L7.

Further, it was provided :that promoter shall be entitled to a grace period of 22.

The Authority put reliance on the judgement of the Hon,ble Appellate Tribunal in appeal no.

433 of 2022 tilted as Emaar MGF Lamd Limited Vs Babia Tiwari and Yogesh Tiwari, wherein it ha held that ifthe allottee wishes to continue with t regarding grace period of thlee months for applying and obtaining the occupation certificate.

The relevant para is reproduced below: As per section 18 of the Act if the project of the promoter is delayed and if the allottee wishes to withdraw then he has the option to withdrow from the project and seek refund of the amount or if the allottee does not intend to withdraw ftom the project qnd wishes to continue with the project, the ollottee is to be paid interest by the promoter for each month of the delay. the delay. ln our opinion if the allottee wishes to continue with the project, he accepts the term of the agreement regarding grqce period ofthree months for opplying ond obtaining the occupation certificqte, So, in view of the above the possession of the unit within 4 years of the start of construction or execution of this Agreement whichever is later.

The buyer,s agreement was executed on 73.72.2013 and date of start of construction is not on record.

So, the due date is calculated from the date Uf execution of buyer's agreement Page 15 of20 HARERA M GURUGRAIII reproduced as under: Complaint No.

2454 of 2022 sqid circumstances, the appetlant-promoter is entitled to qvoil the grace perlod so provided in the agreementfor applying ond obtaining the Occupation Certificate Therefore, in view ofthe above judgement and considering the provisions of the Act, the authority is ofthe view that, the promoter is entitled to avail the grace period so provided in the agreement for applying and obtaining the occupation certificate.

Thus the due date of handing over of possession comes out to be 13.06.2018.

Admissibility ofdelay possession cha-rges at prescribed rate ofinterest: The complainants are seeking delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest on the amount already paid by them.

However, proviso to section 18 provides that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw fronl the project, he shall be paid, by the iromoter, interest for every month of delay, till the handing over of possession, at such rate as may be prescribed and ithas been prescribed undet.r.ule 15 ofthe rules.

Rule 15 has been /cl Rule 75.

Prcscribed iaie oI inlerest- [proviso to,Jectlon 72, section 78 clnd sub-section {4) and subsekion (7) ofsection 191' (7) For the purpose of proviso to section 72; section 1g; and sub-sections (4) and (7) of section 19, the "interest at the rate prescrlbed,, shall be the State Bank of.lndio highest morgilol costollendjng rqte +20,6.: Provided that. ided that.in core lhe State'Bonk of lndia\torginal cost of tending rate (Ucih.l fs lor i, *i.-it snibbe leptiea W sucn benchmark lending rates which the State Bank ofln4ia may frx from time to time for lending to the general public.' 25.

The legislature in its wisdotn in the subordinate legislation under the provision of rule 15 of the rules, has determined the prescribed rate of interest.

The rate of interest so determined by the legislature, is reasonable and ifthe said rule is followed to award the interest, it will ensure uniform practice in all the cases- 26.

Consequently, as per website of the State Bank of India i.e., the marginal cost of lending rate fin short, MCLR) as on date i.e., 21.05.2024 24.

Page 16 of 20 HAREI? . m GURUGRAIvI Complaint No.

2454 of 2022 27.

28. is 8.85%.

Accordingly, the prescribed rate ofinterest will be marginal cost of lending rate +270 i.e., 10.85%0.

The definition of term 'interest' as defined under section z(za] of the Act provides that the rate of interest chargeable from the allottees by the promoter, in case of default, shall be equal to the rate of interest which the promoter shall be liable to pay the allottees, in case of default.

The relevant section is reproduced below: "(za) "interest" means the rates of. interest poyable by the promoter or the allottee, os the case moy be.

Explanation. -For the purpase of this clause- the rqte of interest chargeable ftbin the;altottee by the promoter, in case of default, shall be equal to the rqte 6f interest which the promoter shalt be tiablje to poy the alloltee, in case of Qejoult the interest payable by thgpiogoter tqtltg^allQtte.qshall be from the dote the promoter received the adOu t or ony part therebftill the date the omount or part thereof and intbrest thereonls refuided, a'n/.thi interest payabte by the allottee to the promoter shall be t'rom the dqte th; alhttee defaults in payment Therefore, interest ori iiie rdelAy piyments frdrydtht complainants shall be '. hall be '.rttl charged at the prescriFd'iatb i.e., 10.850/o bj_the respondent/promoter which is the same as is being granted to the complainants in case of delayed possession chalges.

29.

On consideration of the documents available on record and submissions made by both the parties, the authority is satisfied that the respondent is in contravention of the. section 11( J(al of th;: Act by not handing over possession by the due date as per the agreement.

By virtue of clause 3.1 of the agreement, the possession of the subject apartment was to be delivered within 4 years of the start of construction or execution of this Agreement whichever is later.

For the reasons quoted above, the due date ofpossession is to be calculated from the date of execution of buyer agreement i.e., L3,12.2073 and the said time period of 4 years months expired on 13,12.2077 , As far as grace period is concerned, the same is allowed for the Page 17 of 20 ffiHARER Sh GURUGRAM reasons quoted above.

So, the due date L3.06.2018. t:---.-=--.- J Complaint No.

2454 of 2022 of possession comes out to be 30.

The authority is ofthe con respondent,, "u". onroll;"il::].::T,T.;:.:1il::T,rJT,I: complainants as per the 1 dated 13.12.2013 "ru.rr","ttt and conditions of the buyer's agreement the promoter to rulnr its orl between the parties lt is the failure on part of agreement dated 13.12.21 gations and responsibilities as per the buyer's stipulated period to hllq over the possession within the 31.

Section 19(10J of rhe Act , subiect unit within z ,,ooo"t':ut tlS tllottee to take possession ofthe certificare. rn thu p."."nt...yn: ',,'::-g:' qle' of receipt of occupation ",;;;;;',;';;:i:r::Ty:*::;r;*;,::,i1Tffi .:.;": obtaining occupation celtific the interest or nutr.rr ir.,,.illjli" ln".'oTl1t!".1*"''tv rhererore, in _ ,", ,ht complainantJhould be given 2 months, time from t},e date of offLr Jlrpossfssion. rhis,2[or,r1,,]ilu".on"ulu,,n-,u is being given to,r" .o. to,r" .o.plrtirrn,, u""r,;_ ;;;;:;"':'"";:: :o*,*,,,*,* of possession practically he documents including ti.ut not has to arrange a lot of logistics and requisite ,"n o* ;;;;;;;:ffi Jil :,l'.",ffiIijH ;il:::y"Hl* possession is in habitable condition. ,,,. fr.ri,* ctarlfie* ttrat the delay possession charges shall be payable from the due date of possession i.e.

13.06.2018 (calculated from r the date ororrer o,o*."*,;,1o liliffJ* ::ffi ,::TH:?ill The complainants are furtirer directed to take possesslon ofthe a otted unit after clearing all the dues withl consequences as p".,n" o.o,,llo1,l;ilJjffiHand raling which regar Page 18 ofZ0 *HARER i SGuRUoRAM Complaint No.

24S4 of2O22 11[4J[a) read with sectio]r 18(11 of thc Acr on the part of the respondent is established.

As such the complainants are entitled to delay possession charges at rate of the prescribed interest @ 1 0.85% p.a. w.e.f.

13.06.2018 t l the date ofoffer ofpossession (14.1 2.202 2 ) plus two m onths i.e.,14.02.2023; as per provisio,s ofsection 1g(1) orthe Act read with rure 15 0fthe Rures.

Directions ofthe authority 33.

Hence, the authority hereby passes this order and issues the following directions under section 37 ol the Act to ensure compliance of obligations cast upon the promoter as per the function entrusted to the authoritv uncler section 34[0: i.

The respondent is directed to pay delayed possession interest at the prescribed rate i.e., 10.g5(% per anllum for every nronth ofdelay on the amount paid by the complainant from clue clate of possession i.e., 13.06.2018 till offer of possession (1 4.12.2022) plus two months i.e., up to 14.02.2023 as per proviso to section 1B[1J ofthe Act read with rule 32.

Accordingly, the non-compliance of the mandate contained in section 15 ofthe rules. ii.

The arrear.s of such interest accrued from 13.06. rom 13.06.201g till date of this order shall be paid by the promoter to the allottee within a period of 90 days from date of this order as per rule 16(2J of the rules and any amount towards the delay possession interest already paid or credited in account of allottec shall be adjusted/deducted from such payable amount, if any. iii.

The rate of interest chargeable from the allottee by the promoter, in case of default shall be charged at the prescribed rate i.e., 10.g5 o/o by the respondent/promoter which is the same rate of interest which the promoter shall be liable to pay the allottee, in case of default i.e., the delayed possession charges as per section 2(zaJ ofthe Act.

Page 19 of20 34.

35.

HARERA GURUGRAM The respondent shall anything complainant which is not the part of the tt buyer's t.

No holding charges shall be levied as per settled by Hon'ble Court in Civil Appeal no.

020 decided on 1 .2020 be consigned to Haryana Gurugram Dated: 21.05.2 Goyal) H \:2 l UG Page 20 of 20 E",,pr"t*n"r4sGrort-l ,*T,{6;-